The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The SF‐36 in an Australian sample: validating a new, generic health status measure
Abstract
Abstract: The SF‐36 is a self‐reported, 36‐item, generic measure of health status that has been validated for adult age groups in the United States, the United Kingdom and in some non‐English‐speaking countries. The Australian Bureau of Statistics used it in the 1995 National Health Survey and it has been used in health status measurement, in monitoring health outcomes and in clinical trials. The validity of the SF‐36 was examined in the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health Record Linkage Study using a sample of 555 respondents to the National Heart Foundation Risk Factor Prevalence Survey in 1989; they were followed up in 1992. Items chosen for the scale had been used in health status assessment and had stood the test of time. The health concepts measured demonstrated good internal consistency. The eight scales of the SF‐36 formed factors as predicted in the general health dimensions of physical and mental health. The component scales of the SF‐36 demonstrated good discrimination between people with and without health conditions, including those with medical and those with psychiatric types of conditions. Although the SF‐36 was a valid measure of general health status among Australian respondents, further work is needed to establish clinical validity and to produce population norms for Australia. Use of the SF‐36 will allow Australian and international comparison of health status from the point of view of the users of health services.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The MOS Short-form General Health Survey: Reliability and Validity in a Patient Population
Stewart, A. L., Hays, R. D., & Ware, J. E. (1988) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-198807000-00007 · Cited by 3,339
Performance of a Five-Item Mental Health Screening Test
Berwick, D. M., Murphy, J. M., Goldman, P. A., Ware, J. E., Barsky, A. J., & Weinstein, M. C. (1991) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199102000-00008 · Cited by 1,660
Cited by
Ware, J. E. (2000) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200012150-00008 · Cited by 4,455
The Factor Structure of the SF-36 Health Survey in 10 Countries
Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., Gandek, B., Aaronson, N. K., Apolone, G., Bech, P., Brazier, J., Bullinger, M., Kaasa, S., Leplège, A., et al. (1998) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00107-3 · Cited by 655
Diabetes, Depression, and Quality of Life
Goldney, R. D., Phillips, P. J., Fisher, L. J., & Wilson, D. H. (2004) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.27.5.1066 · Cited by 614
The Impact of Stuttering on the Quality of Life in Adults Who Stutter
Craig, A., Blumgart, E., & Tran, Y. (2009) · Journal of Fluency Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jfludis.2009.05.002 · Cited by 490
Chisolm, T. H., Johnson, C. E., Danhauer, J. L., Portz, L. J. P., Abrams, H. B., Lesner, S., McCarthy, P. A., & Newman, C. W. (2007) · Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · doi:10.3766/jaaa.18.2.7 · Cited by 469
Metadata
- Authors
- McCallum, J.
- Venue
- Australian Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-04
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 160-166
- ISSN
- 1035-7319 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2009618426
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 20.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The SF‐36 in an Australian sample: validating a new, generic health status measure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1753-6405.1995.tb00367.x
- The paper
- McCallum, J. (1995). The SF‐36 in an Australian sample: validating a new, generic health status measure. Australian Journal of Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-6405.1995.tb00367.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.